FDA Fries Acrylamide Hype

When law students resort to suing their alma mater, it may signal a weak employment market for the litigiously inclined. Unfortunately, some California lawyers have been putting their degrees to use in another creative but abusive way: bounty-hunting under Proposition 65, the state’s toxic “right-to-know” law. But fortunately for consumers, one of their latest get-rich-quick strategies may be a dead end.

Since Prop 65’s passage in 1986, lawyers have exploited this safe-drinking-water law to shakedown food manufacturers for producing foods that have chemicals in them that might—emphasize might—be carcinogenic, depending on the exposure. In their sights now is a chemical called acrylamide. In 1990, California listed acrylamide as potentially hazardous due to concerns about workplace exposure. But more recently, scientists discovered that acrylamide can form in foods (in very, very low levels) during frying, roasting, and baking.

"The FDA is continuing its research on acrylamide, but there is nothing that has been shown that this is a public health concern," says FDA spokesman Doug Karas.

Karas says recent tests on animals showed that when exposed to very high levels of acrylamide, it can lead to cancer. But he says those are "much higher levels than we would ever be exposed to when eating."

In fact, trace amounts of acrylamide can be found in prune juice, roasted asparagus, olives, breads, tomato sauce, and banana chips. Perhaps California lawyers think they should demand a skull-and-crossbones on every restaurant menu and in every grocery aisle. More likely, though, is that voters will get around to finally amending this case of good intentions run amok.